Fischer v. Appeals Board of New York State Department of Motor Vehicles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fischer v. Appeals Board of New York State Department of Motor Vehicles

49 A.D.3d 643, 852 N.Y.2d 787

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 11, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 49 A.D.3d 643 (Fischer v. Appeals Board of New York State Department of Motor Vehicles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fischer v. Appeals Board of New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, 49 A.D.3d 643, 852 N.Y.2d 787 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

[644]*644The determination that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1) is supported by substantial evidence and must be confirmed (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 179 [1978]; Matter of Resciniti v Department of Motor Vehs. of State of N.Y., 255 AD2d 589 [1998]; Matter of Bailen v Commissioner of Motor Vehs., 147 AD2d 560, 561 [1989]). The petitioner’s challenge to the administrative determination rests upon an issue of credibility which was primarily for the fact-finder to resolve (see Matter of J. Bruno Sons, Inc. v Martinez, 15 AD3d 485, 486 [2005]; Matter of Kahn v State of N.Y. Dept. of Motor Vehs., 134 AD2d 594 [1987]).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are either not properly before us or without merit. Fisher, J.P., Dillon, McCarthy and Belen, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[644]*644The determination that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1) is supported by substantial evidence and must be confirmed (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 179 [1978]; Matter of Resciniti v Department of Motor Vehs. of State of N.Y., 255 AD2d 589 [1998]; Matter of Bailen v Commissioner of Motor Vehs., 147 AD2d 560, 561 [1989]). The petitioner’s challenge to the administrative determination rests upon an issue of credibility which was primarily for the fact-finder to resolve (see Matter of J. Bruno Sons, Inc. v Martinez, 15 AD3d 485, 486 [2005]; Matter of Kahn v State of N.Y. Dept. of Motor Vehs., 134 AD2d 594 [1987]).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are either not properly before us or without merit. Fisher, J.P., Dillon, McCarthy and Belen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 643, 852 N.Y.2d 787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fischer-v-appeals-board-of-new-york-state-department-of-motor-vehicles-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack